Sure I know the difference, a theory is a more or less accepted explanation for a variety of phenomena that can't really be proven. Laws are based on observational data and have been proven to be true; therefore they are used to predict future occurrences.

The most widely accepted explanation of how the universe came into existence is the big bang theory, which is basically this:

According to the Big Bang theory, the universe began with one large explosion, which took place about 15 to 20 billion years ago. We now refer to this explosion that began the universe as the Big Bang, and it is from this theory that we are able to examine the evolution of the universe, from the milliseconds of creation to the creation of galaxies, and from the formation of planets to the presence of life on Earth. Because almost all astronomical phenomena can be explained entirely within the context of the Big Bang, or if not completely, can be explained to a greater degree than any other mode, this model of the universe has become the most widely accepted up to this point.

Here are some conveniently unexplained questions stemming from this theory. First, how an explosion created a universe that operates intricately and purposefully is beyond anyone's comprehension. If you look at anythinig else, such as a car, you don't create one by an explosion in a factory, right? Someone has to plan it and assemble it. Even an evolutionist, Donald Page, says that "There is no mechanism known as yet that would allow the Universe to begin in an arbitrary state and then evolve to its present highly ordered state." I mean, we're not dumb, we as humans know that explosions cause disorder, so why did this one cause order? For being a scientific claim, this is an awfully simplistic idea in my opinion.

If you want science that refutes this "scientific theory" then you just have to look to the Law of Conservation of Matter, which since it's a law, has been proven to be true. Where did space, time, energy, or matter come from? Matter can't be created or destroyed, right? Either this law is wrong, or the theory is wrong.

Then you have the Law of Increased Entropy, which basically says that the energy available after a chemical reaction is less than that at the beginning of the reaction. Since it's assumed that at the beginning there was no energy (as it came with the explosion), there couldn't have been more energy afterwards.

Another law this theory violates is the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum because this one states that the momentum of a body remains constant if it's not acted on by an external force. If this is true, then why do Venus, Uranus, and Pluto spin backwards? It would take an incredible amount of power to spin a planet, so to explain this, Big Bang theorists propose that whatever singularity blew up to create the universe was already spinning before it exploded. If that were true, then all bodies coming from it would have to be spinning in the same direction. So how do scientists explain this phenomenon of Retrograde Motion? They now say that there were cosmic impacts that have stopped the spinning of these planets and actually caused them to spin the other way. One would think that this would have to be an impact so strong that it would at least make a dent in the planet, but they don't have them so this clearly couldn't have happened.

So you see, I think people who don't believe in a God can at least see the absurdity of what explanations humanity has come up with. Of course, these are only a few of the many flaws in this theory and I haven't even addressed those of evolution or intelligent design which certainly have their fair share of them.

(lol, your opening was rather hilarious)
Nope, i'm not gonna participate in this. I told God, sorry I know your chemistry knowledge level is A+, A-star A-diamond, but I'm not a chem or physics kid, cos you created me this way hehe.. So he kindly lets me off being retarded about scientific theories. ^__^ instead, blessed me with artistic talents wooh)

*Sigh* Now I have to go into the Big Bang theory. This is going to be annoying but alright I will explain it as your understanding is tentative at best and your concluions ridiculous. I suspect you got this from a church pamphlet. Regardless this is the ONLY post I will make debating science here as it is so annoying to explain it.
The Big bang theory is based on two important assumptions that we can not prove one hundred percent though we have made efforts to test the two of them. They are:
1.The Cosmological Principle- Basically this states the universe is both isotropic and also homogeneous. The universe on a large scale is the same. This a fairly advanced concept which means the universe is one large structure that is in mechanical equilibrium.
2. That physical laws apply everywhere in the universe

I mention this first as I admit that if either of these is false than the Big Bang is disproved and also that we can not prove them to be true at the present time. Next we will move on to a Big Bang timeline.

The energy in the big bang did not come out of nowhere. Or at least we do not think that it did. There are several ideas put forth as to what the universe was like before the big, bang generally called the Augustian era. Some include string landscape, Hawking-Harte State, and brane inflation. I will not go into them here but I mention them so that you understand the bib bang is not "everything just randomly appears" as you tried to disprove it with the law of conservation of matter (idiotic).

By this time I have already used terms that I am sure you are not familiar with and most am hating doing this but I will press on in the name of scientific literacy.
ok BIG BANG OCCURS WOOOOOSH Extrapolation of the expansion of the universe in time with relativity yields an infinite density and temperature at a finite time in the past. Relativity itself breaks down and we call the initial hot period the big bang.

we start what is known as Planck Epoch. At this time which we think was up to10to the -43 seconds after the big bang. At this time if super symmetry is true the four basic forces electromagnetism, weak nuclear force, strong nuclear force and gravity were all one force. Not much is known about this period sadly. It is thought that perhaps string theory can explain it but no one is sure.

Next comes the period known as the unification period. Thought to be between 10 to the -43 seconds after the big bang to 10 to the -35 . The universe is expanding and cooling right? At this time gravity began to separate from the other forces. Eventually it breaks off destroying the unification of the four forces.

Ok to the inflationary epoch! This was around 10 to the -35 and 10 to the -32 after the big bang. The universe becomes flat and spreads out in the state defined in the cosmological principle and rapidly expands in the structure laid down by scale invariant fluctuations. Next the universe starts to reheat and the universes first expansion stops.
At this point we have particles and how those particles changed over time and formed the universe is HIGHLY technical (gah photons, quarks, the universes density its all annoying) and I wont go into it except to say eventually atomic nuclei formed and hydrogen and helium atoms began to form. . Stars form from the materials that the bang made such as hydrogen and lithium being made into lighter elements. These stars called "population 3 " stars no longer exist. Large volumes of matter collapse making galaxies and the planets etc. The universe is currently expanding .

Do you see why its hard to explain it to people? Its complexity is the only reason you people still have followers who believe in creationism. This is why I posted links before. I mentioned all of that to show you how hard it is to grasp this shit ok? The scope of science is too great for discussion here . I refuse to make such a long post on science again.

To answer your attempts to refute big bang theory:
1. I already answered your one about matter
2. The planets were not formed right after the big bang. They were formed a shitload of years later. If the universe is rotating that way you fail to refute it. Since the universe remember according to the cosmological principle is one object and thus how the planets are going matter little if the universe itself is going that way .
3. There was energy before the big bang as I said so increased entropy does not apply here.

Science is complex. Really really massively complex. Please do not try to confuse people with your pseudo science as most of the time people like me wont refute you. I think you are most likely a kid of 14 trying to fight for gawd. I dont know for sure but any respect for you I had evaporated with your post. Pathetic! EP I C F A I L

What does 'people like you' refer to? I like your conclusion, for a 'scientific intellectual' to end off, it's very generically and loosely composed, is that for the benefits of 'idiots' here to understand?

For someone who has apparently 'grasped that 'shit'' I'm happy for you, since you seem to have grasped a great and strong hold of it. That great knowledge you've gotten hold of, Christians believe is a study of God's creation.

Shockshockhorrorhorror!

God apparently has knowledge so far up it takes so many disputes, debates and still doesn't solve anything, which is really, a waste of time, isn't it? Since, time goes on, and so what if people get convinced to believe in God, or science? Debates of man are hypothetical theories unless otherwise proved. If God is around, he WILL protect his Holy Bible. If one day, somehow the sale of Bible ceases to naught, and the translations are distorted, prophecies in the Bible do not happen, then you can safely assume God is rubbish, and earth is created by the Big Bang, to which I'm sorry, because as you claim it's beyond the understanding of Christians, so we don't understand your terminologies.

Since like you said, you cannot prove them, and man cannot prove God, (because if God is around, why is it even up to MAN to prove GOD, when he chooses not to reveal Himself? ) I vote we wait it out, and see what happens. Otherwise, further debates hardly stirs those who are seated firmly in Christ, and since it's not a fight for children of God to fight for God's existence, science wouldn't really suffer an attack from Christians anyway, cos we don't even know how to use the terminology right?

I agree, I don't know science well enough to sustain a scientific debate, since I actually believe science is a tool to unveil God's beautiful creations,so that's hardly applicable, but I hardly doubt atheists have an understanding deep enough of our belief to debate with us about God himself. Most of them circle the idea of 'He does not exist', and attempt to provide scientific evidence, violence in the world, seemingly contradictory statements from the Bible, false prophets, to disprove it.

The most interesting kinds have studied the Bible intensely, attacked it word for word, cover to cover, and yet they fail to understand what God actually is saying to his children. When told, they get insulted at thinking that christians are arrogant, that they have a special message, which they imagine, when actually, atheists who study the Bible do not have a heart to seek him sincerely. You can look at the same picture, but your mentality prior to viewing that picture will cause different interpretations to arise. If you view the Bible with disbelief, you'll take note to find things that support your idea. Christians, on the other hand, adapt their ideas to fit the Bible, since we hold it as the central source.

Lastly, the last time I checked, this IS a Christian group for Christians. Your casual conclusion would be true if the case were that Christians entered a science related group to debate. 'Most of the time' in this case would be dedicated to God, if you don't mind. This IS a Christian group afterall.

You can quote and reply to me, but I'm not going to respond, because my post was mainly for the sake to once again, state that there can be no right and no wrong, not until one of the theories fall flat on its face, and we see it. Until it does, debating does not do anything other than waste a bunch of time, if nobody is going to convince nobody. (Which definitely, I know people who don't like to lose wouldn't just leave it, so we'll consider that Christians are ignorant, loonies, dangerous, and

John 20:29
Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

Genesis 12:2-4 (New International Version)
3 I will bless those who bless you,
and whoever curses you I will curse;
and all peoples on earth
will be blessed through you."

What does 'people like you' refer to? I like your conclusion, for a 'scientific intellectual' to end off, it's very generically and loosely composed, is that for the benefits of 'idiots' here to understand?

For someone who has apparently 'grasped that 'shit'' I'm happy for you, since you seem to have grasped a great and strong hold of it. That great knowledge you've gotten hold of, Christians believe is a study of God's creation.

Shockshockhorrorhorror!

God apparently has knowledge so far up it takes so many disputes, debates and still doesn't solve anything, which is really, a waste of time, isn't it? Since, time goes on, and so what if people get convinced to believe in God, or science? Debates of man are hypothetical theories unless otherwise proved. If God is around, he WILL protect his Holy Bible. If one day, somehow the sale of Bible ceases to naught, and the translations are distorted, prophecies in the Bible do not happen, then you can safely assume God is rubbish, and earth is created by the Big Bang, to which I'm sorry, because as you claim it's beyond the understanding of Christians, so we don't understand your terminologies.

Since like you said, you cannot prove them, and man cannot prove God, (because if God is around, why is it even up to MAN to prove GOD, when he chooses not to reveal Himself? ) I vote we wait it out, and see what happens. Otherwise, further debates hardly stirs those who are seated firmly in Christ, and since it's not a fight for children of God to fight for God's existence, science wouldn't really suffer an attack from Christians anyway, cos we don't even know how to use the terminology right?

I agree, I don't know science well enough to sustain a scientific debate, since I actually believe science is a tool to unveil God's beautiful creations,so that's hardly applicable, but I hardly doubt atheists have an understanding deep enough of our belief to debate with us about God himself. Most of them circle the idea of 'He does not exist', and attempt to provide scientific evidence, violence in the world, seemingly contradictory statements from the Bible, false prophets, to disprove it.

The most interesting kinds have studied the Bible intensely, attacked it word for word, cover to cover, and yet they fail to understand what God actually is saying to his children. When told, they get insulted at thinking that christians are arrogant, that they have a special message, which they imagine, when actually, atheists who study the Bible do not have a heart to seek him sincerely. You can look at the same picture, but your mentality prior to viewing that picture will cause different interpretations to arise. If you view the Bible with disbelief, you'll take note to find things that support your idea. Christians, on the other hand, adapt their ideas to fit the Bible, since we hold it as the central source.

Lastly, the last time I checked, this IS a Christian group for Christians. Your casual conclusion would be true if the case were that Christians entered a science related group to debate. 'Most of the time' in this case would be dedicated to God, if you don't mind. This IS a Christian group afterall.

You can quote and reply to me, but my post was mainly for the sake to once again, state that there can be no right and no wrong, not until one of the theories fall flat on its face, and we see it. Until it does, debating does not do anything other than waste a bunch of time, if nobody is going to convince nobody.

Good post. I admit I was a tad arrogant there but it was because I was angry at his arguments. People like me are people who have studied science some. Again I was kinda arrogant. I am kinda sorry for that but then again in debate you have to throw mercy to the way side. I also admit that you may well be right and me wrong and neither of us is likely to be convinced by the other one. However I did not start this thread. MOST of the time if you think a thread is not central to the groups theme you should go to person who made it and not someone who responded. I really dont understand what you meant with that most of the time stuff. *shrugs*. Sorry I guess. Overall I wish to say I am sorry for my arrogance. Its really is something I feel bad about but since I am a jerk will let stand
Finally it is not beyond the understanding of Christians just people who lack a scientific background. There are many brilliant religious scientists. Just not as many as there are non religious ones.

Well I agree that no one is going to convince anyone here, so I won't comment any further on the scientific aspect after this either.

I'm quite certain that even you don't understand everything you said there, and since you (or anyone else for that matter) will never be ever to prove it, you are just as blind for following what man has told you (since I assume you are not a scientist yourself) as you claim Christians to be for following Jesus. As much you are trying to make me feel stupid for the arguments I made, throwing in a timeline or whatever information that supports it doesn't help one bit. If this theory had no flaws, then scientists would all be in agreement on it, unless of course you feel that scientists who debunk this theory aren't qualified.

You know what, though, I really doubt that you believe there isn't a God. You constantly have the nagging feeling to come in here and argue about something that you say you don't even believe in. I'm sure there are much better things to do with your time, or maybe you're just that bored, I don't know. No true follower of Christ will ever abandon God for you and I thank you for your attitude, as I'm sure it encourages others to seek Christ in an effort to keep from ending up so miserable like you are. You ever want to have a real conversation about it, though, you know where your resources are.

Well I agree that no one is going to convince anyone here, so I won't comment any further on the scientific aspect after this either.

I'm quite certain that even you don't understand everything you said there, and since you (or anyone else for that matter) will never be ever to prove it, you are just as blind for following what man has told you (since I assume you are not a scientist yourself) as you claim Christians to be for following Jesus. As much you are trying to make me feel stupid for the arguments I made, throwing in a timeline or whatever information that supports it doesn't help one bit. If this theory had no flaws, then scientists would all be in agreement on it, unless of course you feel that scientists who debunk this theory aren't qualified.

You know what, though, I really doubt that you believe there isn't a God. You constantly have the nagging feeling to come in here and argue about something that you say you don't even believe in. I'm sure there are much better things to do with your time, or maybe you're just that bored, I don't know. No true follower of Christ will ever abandon God for you and I thank you for your attitude, as I'm sure it encourages others to seek Christ in an effort to keep from ending up so miserable like you are. You ever want to have a real conversation about it, though, you know where your resources are.

I do not seek god here but rather to enjoy myself while making the stupid people here look stupid and to learn more about your religion. Though I already know a great deal. It is easy to get on this site and others whole doing my work on my computer. Please also do not assume I am miserable. The only miserable thing here is your understanding of science. I really think I did make you look stupid no offense. You obviously dont grasp big bang theory was my point. Since this is the case you should never have tried to argue against it unless you wanted someone to attack you. Though I commend your resolution not to comment on the scientific aspects as clearly as stated above you do no understand them.

It is silly to assume all scientist would agree with it if it was true. Very very silly as there is always going to be debate in the community. Also you must look at the QUALITY of the scientist. When all respectable authorities (or a large majority) accept something as true that likely it is the best explanation at the time. So yes there are going to be dissenters but then again every great idea has them. This theory is accepted on circumstantial evidence. A TON of it so do not compare it to faith in god which has no logical basis at all. It does not make something wrong to be questioned. Rather things that are under constant attack such as evolution and the big bang gain more and more plausibility as people attempt to refute them and fail. So to argue that since it is attacked it is most likely wrong is so silly I had to stifle a laugh.

I am studying science right now as it happens (also studying philosophy) . So sorry I am not taking the words of others as fact here without looking into it myself though I find it positive you admit that is what you are doing. I am here to be a voice of dissent. I am everywhere I can. Before college I never imagined that there could be so many different viewpoints on things. I think its good people like me will be there to make you think no matter how much you resist.

Why learn more about something you don't believe? Yes, I assume you're miserable because you find pleasure in trying to destroy other people's happiness, who have absolutely nothing to do with you. They are minding their own business, but you refuse to let it go.

I'm not a scientist so why should I understand it as if I were? You don't know everything about science either so plenty of people would find your thoughts laughable too. So fine, you can think you made me look stupid (and don't pretend you didn't intend to offend me) but you're the one who believes the wrong thing, so I don't mind. You don't even question anything that science doesn't offer an explanation for at your own convenience. Like I said before, you're implying that scientists who don't believe in this theory aren't of good quality, since I'm sure you've met them all and decided for yourself who is the expert (even though science is their career and are clearly more knowledgable than you are). So actually, taking what others say as fact is exactly what you're doing unless you've done all of this big bang research yourself so quit acting like these thoughts came from you. Science changes all of the time, there is always a new "fact" to believe. What you believe by science today will be considered ridiculous in a few years.

God doesn't change, never has, never will. Of course you're welcome to continue wasting your time because the only thing you are making anyone think about is how anyone can deny there is a God.

I do not seek god here but rather to enjoy myself while making the stupid people here look stupid and to learn more about your religion. Though I already know a great deal. It is easy to get on this site and others whole doing my work on my computer. Please also do not assume I am miserable.

Once again, if you are interested only in making stupid people look stupid, then you're wasting your time, AND learn more about our religion, then you're really at the wrong place here.

First off. This is basic. But if people are stupid, as you say, they will reflect stupidity whether you provoke them or not. If you want to learn about God, go to His Word, not our words. Why make use of a tool of a tool when you can go straight to his wisdom? Fools are very frequently mentioned in the Bible:

Proverbs 8:5
O you simple ones, understand prudence, And you fools, be of an understanding heart.

Proverbs 14:9
Fools mock at sin, But among the upright there is favor.

Proverbs 13:20
He who walks with wise men will be wise, But the companion of fools will be destroyed.

(Oh dear, you really are in the wrong place)

One thing I know about wisdom, is that it is not wise to flaunt it when people don't need it. Fools obviously do not understand and will not increase in understanding. Wise men seldom speaks. When they do, their words are impactful.

Proverbs 15:2
The tongue of the wise uses knowledge rightly, But the mouth of fools pours forth foolishness.

Ecclesiastes 9:17
Words of the wise, spoken quietly, should be heard. Rather than the shout of a ruler of fools.

Wise people are not measured by themselves, but by the Lord, for who can tell a person's heart?

Romans 1:22
Professing to be wise, they became fools,

1 Corinthians 4:3-7
I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself.
My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me.
Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men's hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

For who makes you different from anyone else? What do you have that you did not receive? And if you did receive it, why do you boast as though you did not?

Don't you feel that it's a little ironic you have to come to a 'stupid place' to make 'stupid people' look foolish? For fools reflect each other, just like mirrors reflect your appearance.

Those who make an impact are those whose wisdom have rendered people above in terms of intellect speechless. Going 'down' to a level of stupidity is like picking a fight with plants. We find this rather amusing, because the Bible wrote precisely, that children of God are anchored, embedded IN Christ, who is at the Father's right hand (ie. in the high place of blessings). What is the point, when fools do not understand they've been made fun of?

Wisdom calls

The Call of Wisdom20 Wisdom calls aloud outside;
She raises her voice in the open squares.

21 She cries out in the chief concourses,
At the openings of the gates in the city
She speaks her words:

22 “ How long, you simple ones, will you love simplicity?
For scorners delight in their scorning,
And fools hate knowledge.

23 Turn at my rebuke;
Surely I will pour out my spirit on you;
I will make my words known to you.

24 Because I have called and you refused,
I have stretched out my hand and no one regarded,

25 Because you disdained all my counsel,
And would have none of my rebuke,

26 I also will laugh at your calamity;
I will mock when your terror comes,

27 When your terror comes like a storm,
And your destruction comes like a whirlwind,
When distress and anguish come upon you.

28 “ Then they will call on me, but I will not answer;
They will seek me diligently, but they will not find me.

29 Because they hated knowledge
And did not choose the fear of the LORD,

30 They would have none of my counsel
And despised my every rebuke.

31 Therefore they shall eat the fruit of their own way,
And be filled to the full with their own fancies.

32 For the turning away of the simple will slay them,
And the complacency of fools will destroy them;

33 But whoever listens to me will dwell safely,
And will be secure, without fear of evil.”

It's easy, isn't it? To become wise, stay around the wise. Pay attention when wisdom calls, refuse not reproach or reproof for they are for your own sake.

You all are free to continue discussing about God and Science, but seriously, if you are interested in these goals mentioned above then it really defeats the purpose.

Yeah, I know it was a little off topic, but at least it addresses your concerns. I hope this won't cause derailing of threads, cos I would have to start moderating if flaming starts.

Not possible. The big bang is an impossible theory. Don't try to defend it. There's absolutely no way the big bang created the universe. Evolution is physically impossible also.

LOL I have never seen such an immature and stupid post in my life, you are one of those people who take the bible completely literally I take it? Moron. How about the dinosaurs then? Oh and WHY is it impossible exactly? I await your response.

Not possible. The big bang is an impossible theory. Don't try to defend it. There's absolutely no way the big bang created the universe. Evolution is physically impossible also.

LOL I have never seen such an immature and stupid post in my life, you are one of those people who take the bible completely literally I take it? Moron. How about the dinosaurs then? Oh and WHY is it impossible exactly? I await your response.

I said the big bang theory was impossible, evolution is impossible. Dinosaurs are very possible, dinosaurs existed. Evidence points to the existance of dinosaurs. Evidence points AGAINST Evolution and Big bang theory.

Let us use logic. Compare the big bang to a puzzle. We have all the pieces and elements to build a puzzle in one room (i.e. the 'explosive' element - human, elements to make worlds - puzzle pieces). If I threw down an incomplete 2000 piece jigsaw puzzle, The chances of a puzzle being completed in such a manner is infinitly small, so no chance at all. Let us automatically assume all the pieces are present for the big bang to create the universe, which I seriously doubt and chances are low. Compare throwing a puzzle down at the ground to the big bang explosion. the chances of it forming a single planet or star are 1 in infinity. Now, there are 9 planets in this solar system, at least 20-40 moons in orbiting each planet, 1 sun, plus thousands of stars in the universe. The chances of getting 1 every time is impossible. Not to mention non, decaying orbits and their chances.

Now, consider the planet earth, the only planet that can support life in this solar system. The Earth is perfectly close and far enough away to support life. Chances of that are also 1 in an infinity. Let me know if you want me to continue, because I have more.

Now personally, I do not believe that God used any 'big bang' to create the universe. I believe that he formed them with his hands, and the bible says he made the sun, moon and stars by his hands. Take that verse any way you want. Oh, no flame posts please (i.e. Calling me a moron.). You can insult my post, and call it stupid, but I will not allow you to call me, or any other Christian, stupid.

Not possible. The big bang is an impossible theory. Don't try to defend it. There's absolutely no way the big bang created the universe. Evolution is physically impossible also.

LOL I have never seen such an immature and stupid post in my life, you are one of those people who take the bible completely literally I take it? Moron. How about the dinosaurs then? Oh and WHY is it impossible exactly? I await your response.

I said the big bang theory was impossible, evolution is impossible. Dinosaurs are very possible, dinosaurs existed. Evidence points to the existance of dinosaurs. Evidence points AGAINST Evolution and Big bang theory.

Let us use logic. Compare the big bang to a puzzle. We have all the pieces and elements to build a puzzle in one room (i.e. the 'explosive' element - human, elements to make worlds - puzzle pieces). If I threw down an incomplete 2000 piece jigsaw puzzle, The chances of a puzzle being completed in such a manner is infinitly small, so no chance at all. Let us automatically assume all the pieces are present for the big bang to create the universe, which I seriously doubt and chances are low. Compare throwing a puzzle down at the ground to the big bang explosion. the chances of it forming a single planet or star are 1 in infinity. Now, there are 9 planets in this solar system, at least 20-40 moons in orbiting each planet, 1 sun, plus thousands of stars in the universe. The chances of getting 1 every time is impossible. Not to mention non, decaying orbits and their chances.

Now, consider the planet earth, the only planet that can support life in this solar system. The Earth is perfectly close and far enough away to support life. Chances of that are also 1 in an infinity. Let me know if you want me to continue, because I have more.

Now personally, I do not believe that God used any 'big bang' to create the universe. I believe that he formed them with his hands, and the bible says he made the sun, moon and stars by his hands. Take that verse any way you want. Oh, no flame posts please (i.e. Calling me a moron.). You can insult my post, and call it stupid, but I will not allow you to call me, or any other Christian, stupid.

Ha ha well dude you have your scientific facts, to put it simply, wrong. The planets formed due to the laws of physics (particles drawn together by a force named GRAVITY, you may have heard of it) We know how stars are born, go and properly research it. And comparing the parts of the universe to a puzzle is just moronic (im not saying this cos you are a christian but because of what you said) cos a puzzle only fits one way. There is no set rule to how the universe had to form so in fact the chances that it took one form or another are certain. There are trillions and trillions of ways this universe could have ended up not just one like you are stupidly saying. And by the way you have failed to prove to me why evolution is impossible at all. Also you seem to take the bible completely literally which even 90% of christians acknowledge it is unwise to do. I suggest you stop.